Mediaboss Marketing

In recent weeks, fear of the coronavirus has spread as rapidly as the disease. Confusion and speculation have also festered. Where did the virus originate? How dangerous is it, really? Are we responding appropriately to the virus, or are we giving in to hysteria?

Some people think we should trust doctors, scientists, and health officials to answer these questions. Others think the truth can be found from talking heads on cable news.

I decided to cut out the middle men and go directly to the source. I reached out to the coronavirus, who is currently living in an undisclosed location on the East Coast and everywhere else on the planet. He immediately agreed to an interview if we could agree upon an appropriate location.

Initially, he suggested getting coffee in Terminal B at LaGuardia Airport. I asked if we could chat someplace cleaner and less depressing, so we met inside a medical waste dumpster at Hackensack University Hospital. What follows is our conversation.

FIENE: Im not sure what to call you. COVID-19 seems a little formal, but some people have said its racist to label you the Wuhan virus. Does that name bother you?

VIRUS: Not at all, Im very proud of my Chinese heritage. But Im also really into the whole international thing these days. So if you want to call me the Wuhan virus, cool. But I have lots of other nicknames now toothe Persian Pestilence, Mussolinis Revenge. People in New Jersey have started calling me the Jabronis Roni. Those are all good.

FIENE: One of the things thats caused some confusion is people comparing you to the seasonal flu. Some folks point out that you are perhaps ten times as lethal as the flu, while others have noted that far more people have died of the flu this year. How do you make sense of that?

VIRUS: Its like when Aerosmith had Guns N Roses on their bill back in 88. The sell-out, hacky headliner may have sold more tickets because theyd been around longer, but the opening act rocked way harder and got way bigger once they came into contact with people.

The flu is lame. Hes old news. Stick me in a room filled with 30,000 sweaty people all sharing Miller Lite and Marlboro Reds and Ill slay way more than he can.

FIENE: Where would you find a room filled with 30,000 sweaty people all sharing beer and cigarettes?

VIRUS: I dont know. A Guns N Roses concert, I guess.

FIENE: Many people, like Ann Coulter, have suggested that fears of contracting you are overblown because youre only a serious threat to the elderly? Is that a fair point?

VIRUS: Thats a very fair point if you are fine with old people dying. Which I am.

FIENE: Sticking with the conspiracy theory questions for a moment, Jerry Falwell Jr has suggested that people are making you a bigger deal than you are in order to defeat President Trump. Any truth to that?

VIRUS: In a technical sense, no. In a please believe that so I can kill you after you fail to take reasonable precautions in order to show loyalty to the president sense, yes, its completely true. Please believe it. Hand washing is for socialists.

FIENE: So the medias not using you to defeat Donald Trump?

VIRUS: Well, as all the people Ive killed can tell you, the media arent manufacturing a crisis. But yeah, many of them are framing the crisis in a certain way to make the president look bad. I mean, good grief, did you see Paul Krugman celebrating the Down Jones dropping below 25,000 a few weeks ago? I havent seen anyone rejoicing over a collapse like that since Socratess enemies watched the hemlock kick in.

FIENE: In his address to the nation last Wednesday night, President Trump urged us not to politicize you. But the next day, he and Joe Biden were attacking each other over the crisis. What do you think? As youre becoming a bigger problem, should people put aside partisan squabbling?

VIRUS: No, people should definitely fight over me.

FIENE: In what way?

VIRUS: Preferably hand-to-hand combat. With spitting.

FIENE: According to doctors, you dont cause diarrhea or similar problems. Do you have an obligation to tell people they should stop buying a nine-month supply of toilet paper?

VIRUS: Im actually in contract negotiations for an endorsement deal with Charmin right now, so my lawyer has advised me not to answer that question.

FIENE: You managed to get the NBA, NHL, MLB, and NCAA to suspended athletic activities. Why?

VIRUS: Some people may be surprised to learn this, but Im a trans exclusionary radical feminist, and I was getting fed up with biological men preventing women from being able to succeed in their athletic competitions. And I just sort of figured you cant have men in womens sports if you dont have sports.

FIENE: With no sports to watch, how would you suggest people pass the time while theyre quarantined at home?

VIRUS: Spend quality time with your children. Read classic works of literature. Make sure to lick your neighbors mailboxes.

FIENE: Some people have suggested that you are Gods way of punishing mankind for certain sins. Is that true?

VIRUS: Whenever disaster threatens civilization, you humans have this weird habit of concluding that God is punishing other people for their sins. Amazingly, hes never punishing you for yours.

Look, heres what you guys need to understand. Youre all sinners. Youve all fallen short of the glory of God. And whenever some kind of pandemic sweeps through the world, you should each see this as a reminder that we live in a world of sin and corruption, that you are a part of that sin and corruption, and that you need the forgiveness of Jesus that was poured out for the world on the cross.

Its like what Christ said in Luke 13: those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.In other words, if Im floating around outside your door, dont go to God whining about the sins of your neighbor. Go to God asking Him to take away your sins.

FIENE: Wow, as a pastor, I have to say, thats a very theologically accurate take.

VIRUS: Well, you are writing this fake conversation.

FIENE: Good point. Last question. Considering that many people have died of you, do you think its inappropriate for people to make light of the coronavirus?

VIRUS: I get it. Im scary. Theres no vaccine to inoculate you against me as of now. I can infect nursing homes faster than the term cisgender infected academia. Im shutting down your kids schools. Im in danger of destroying your economy. Im taking the lives of your loved ones, so I understand why some people think its inappropriate to joke about me.

But its important to remember why people make jokes in troubling times. Humor is often the only weapon that the powerless have against the things that threaten them. As the old saying goes, we laugh so we dont cry.

So go right ahead. Mock me. Joke about me because, next to prayer, making fun of frightening things that feel out of your control is just about the best coping mechanism you guys have. And I greatly respect you guys for using it.

FIENE: Really?

VIRUS: I mean, not enough to not kill you, but sure.

The rest is here:
Exclusive Interview With Coronavirus: 'I'm Very Proud Of My Chinese Heritage' - The Federalist

Amid all of the current Coronavirus-induced hysteria, the time-honoured practice of shaking hands has come under intense scrutiny due to the possibility that it might aid the transmission of the disease. One of the more fascinating phenomena to arise from this is that a number of prominent people are now outing themselves as perennial handshake-phobes and asking whether we cant all just dispense with the custom once and for all, even after Coronavirus has run its course.

Famously-frenetic broadcaster, Jeremy Vine, tweeted, Can we all just stop shaking hands anyway? Its a practice that started centuries ago to ensure men didnt reach for their swords its a really shite custom regardless of #coronavirus and we should retire it permanently now weve got the excuse.

Agreed! chimed-in Matt Ridley, the brilliantly-erudite author, science journalist and Tory peer, whose forthcoming book, How Innovation Works, I await, feverishly (but not in a Covid-19 sort of way).

Can coronavirus finally end the disgusting practice of shaking hands? asked US arch-conservative, Ann Coulter.

Even that rhetorical savant and now-former MEP, Daniel Hannan, saw fit to pen a piece for the Telegraph in which he proposed the return of the bow and the curtsy as the silver lining of Coronavirus.

Its as if the Coronavirus epidemic has finally given them the validation theyve secretly always craved. But, with the greatest of respect to Jeremy, Matt, Ann and Daniel, they really need to get a grip. Preferably, a firm one.

There are compelling reasons why the handshake has endured and should continue to do so as the preferred form of greeting or signifying an agreement in much of the world ever since it originated 2,500 years ago in Ancient Greece.

A handshake is a powerful ritual a symbol of trust, goodwill and peace. Extending an open hand to another person and grasping theirs in return, maintaining full and sincere eye-contact all-the-while, is a clear, outward reminder to all concerned of the mutual desire for fair, honest and friendly dealings. Its true that any dastardly cad is equally-capable of participating in a handshake, in full, cynical foreknowledge of their intention to deceive, defraud or harm. Nonetheless, for the worlds honest and decent majority, the ritual of the handshake plays an important role in reinforcing the bonds of our shared values.

Human civilisation has had ample opportunity over the past two-and-a-half millennia to R&D the best possible ritualistic technique for people to greet each other or solidify an agreement. There is a reason why the handshake has prevailed and achieved near-global ubiquity as the preferred option. The bow is too aloof and deferential. The fist bump or its prophylactic variant, the elbow bump is too jocular. The furnishing of Namaste-style praying-hands is insufficiently-secular to serve as a universal greeting. The spread-fingered Vulcan salute is too well Vulcan.

The handshake, on the other hand, strikes the perfect balance: personal and cordial, while neither too formal nor too relaxed. It has been the favourite PR tool of politicians for decades. Nothing less than a handshake could have conveyed to the world the reconciliatory aspirations of Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un at their historic summit in 2019. A fist bump simply would not have sufficed.

There are few better litmus tests for the measure of a persons character than the way that they shake hands. Do they square up, face-to-face, with conviction and aplomb or do they linger, afar, with uncertain intent and their torsos askew? Worse still, do they demonstrate a profound absence of self-awareness and respect for social norms by intruding too closely upon their opposite numbers personal space? Is their grasp reassuringly-firm, poised and confident or is it as my father calls it a floppy and limp wet fish? Do they convey their engagement and openness by maintaining eye-contact or do they avert their glance, evasively? Like a crystal ball into a persons psyche, the handshake reveals all.

Nothing unites us all in the fabric of human connection like the handshake. In an increasingly atomised world, with our growing reliance on technology, with the furious, howling tribalism of social media, the simple act of clasping palms with another person brings us all that much closer together. It rekindles, daily, our sense of fellowship with the rest of humankind.

By all means, lets take whatever precautionary measures are reasonable and warranted while the spectre of Coronavirus looms over us. But, the handshake has survived the profoundly more-deadly Plague of Justinian, Black Death and Spanish Flu, and it should prevail after coronavirus. So, can we please agree to resume this most important and indispensable of customary social practices, once the current viral scourge has moved on? Lets shake on it.

Follow this link:
Will the handshake outlast coronavirus? - Spectator.co.uk

HONEY, WE MOLESTED THE KIDS!

I wonder if any liberals are re-thinking their insistence that the Boy Scouts allow gay men to take 13-year-old boys on overnight camping trips.

HEADLINE: Boy Scouts Files Chapter 11 Bankruptcy in the Face of Thousands of Child Abuse Allegations

The Boy Scouts of America have long been on the lefts hate list. Any organization that has the temerity to train young men in the virtues of integrity, patriotism and self-reliance is putting itself on the fighting side of liberals!

At the 2000 Democratic National Convention, a little group of Boy Scouts took the stage as part of the opening ceremony and were promptly booed by the delegates.

For decades, the BSA has fended off lawsuits demanding that they embrace the holy trinity of Gs: girls, gays and godless atheists. (If only it had occurred to the plaintiffs to start their own organizations! They could have given them names like The Girl Scouts.)

Why would any liberal want to join an organization that was, according to them, sexist, Bible-thumping and bigoted? They didnt. The lawsuits were kill shots.

For the left, whats not to hate about the Boy Scouts? Their oath is: On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.

Nearly 200 NASA astronauts were Boy Scouts. The great outdoorsman, Teddy Roosevelt, was such a BSA booster than he was made the one and only Chief Scout Citizen, a scout for life.

A Louis Harris & Associates study in 1996 found that men who had been scouts placed a higher value on honesty than those who had not.

But now the lawsuits have killed them. Congratulations, Democrats, The New York Times and corporate America. (I hope all their future employees steal from them, after being raised on Grand Theft Auto instead of the Boy Scout oath.)

From the beginning, BSA has had to deal with child molesters eagerly signing up to go camping with 13-year-old boys in isolated areas away from all observation.

Within a decade of its 1910 founding, the BSA began keeping internal files on ineligible scouting volunteers, known as the perversion files.

Scout leaders were not to be alone with boys and, starting in 1988, all adult applicants were subjected to aggressive background screening. The organization promptly removed any scout leaders based on mere suspicion and alerted law enforcement in about a third of the cases.

Nonetheless, between 1970 and 1991, up to .04% of Boy Scouts may have been molested. Thats about 2,000 out of several million boys.

Given all of this, what sort of escaped mental patient would demand that the Boy Scouts admit openly gay scout leaders?

Yes, we know most gays arent child molesters. How could we not? Its part of our secular catechism, along with the one about most Muslims not being terrorists and most immigrants not being criminals.

But men who molest boys are a small slice infinitesimal really! within a larger category known as gay. Its not two totally different things, like an architect and a dentist. Some men like blondes. Some like brunettes. But theyre all within the category of heterosexual.

No parent is going to send their young sons camping alone in the woods with an openly gay man for the same reason they wouldnt send their adolescent daughters to be alone in the woods with an openly heterosexual man.

And now the BSA has been whiplashed into bankruptcy by liberals demanding, on one hand, that the scouts allow gays to be troop leaders and, on the other hand, filing lawsuits accusing the scouts of not taking strong enough measures to prevent gay troop leaders from molesting boys.

Couldnt liberals get together and decide for themselves whether the Boy Scouts should have been more aggressive in preventing child molestation or less?

For their defense witnesses, the Boy Scouts should call New York Times editors, Democratic politicians and corporate CEOs.

Back in 1980, when a gay guy lost his lawsuit against BSA for dropping him as a scout leader, Wells Fargo, the United Way of San Francisco, Levi Strauss and the Bank of America cut off funding to the organization. San Francisco and Oakland schools prohibited the scouts from using their facilities on weekdays.

After the Supreme Courts disturbingly narrow 5-4 decision in 2000 holding that the Boy Scouts could not be forced to admit gay scout leaders, the Times denounced the decision in an editorial, calling the courts ruling one of its lowest moments of the term.

The following month, the Times ethicist, Randy Cohen, advised a reader to pull her son out of the Cub Scouts, saying it was the ethical thing to do. The ethicist explained: Just as one is honor bound to quit an organization that excludes African-Americans, so you should withdraw from scouting as long as it rejects homosexuals.

Also in response to the Supreme Courts decision, Chase Manhattan Bank, Textron Inc. and dozens more United Way chapters withdrew millions of dollars in contributions. More cities dropped their support of the Boy Scouts.

In his pre-Super Bowl TV interview in 2013, President Barack Obama was still harping on the Boy Scouts refusal to allow gay scoutmasters: Gays and lesbians should have access and opportunity the same way everybody else does.

On CNN, host Carol Costello haughtily informed a guest opposed to gay scoutmasters, Well, Ill just say that the American Psychological Association has studied the issue that you just mentioned. Homosexuals arent any more likely to molest kids than straight men.

Throughout the lefts 30-year assault on the Boy Scouts for discriminating against gays, the Catholic Church was embroiled in its own molestation crisis. More than 80% of the molester priests were accused of victimizing teenage boys.

Instead of saying, Oh I see what the Boy Scouts are doing, liberals responded to the gay sex-abuse crisis in the priesthood by blaming ... celibacy!

Isnt it a thought crime to question whether sexual preference is determined at birth? But liberals not only believed gayness was the result of an adult lifestyle choice celibacy but they knew how to cure it: Allow priests to marry!

Since the one thing we know is that men molesting boys has nothing to do with being gay, I guess this time its camping that causes sodomy.

Ann Coulter is the writer of 12 best-selling books,

including In Trump We Trust.

Read the original:
ANN COULTER:The Boy Scouts have long been on the left's hate list - MDJOnline.com

I wonder if any liberals are re-thinking their insistence that the Boy Scouts allow gay men to take 13-year-old boys on overnight camping trips.

HEADLINE:Boy Scouts Files Chapter 11 Bankruptcy in the Face of Thousands of Child Abuse Allegations

The Boy Scouts of America (BSA) have long been on the lefts hate list. Any organization that has the temerity to train young men in the virtues of integrity, patriotism, and self-reliance is putting itself on the fighting side of liberals!

At the 2000 Democratic National Convention, a little group of Boy Scouts took the stage as part of the opening ceremony and were promptly booed by the delegates.

For decades, the BSA has fended off lawsuits demanding that they embrace the holy trinity of Gs: girls, gays, and godless atheists. (If only it had occurred to the plaintiffs to start their own organizations! They could have given them names like The Girl Scouts.)

Why would any liberal want to join an organization that was, according to them, sexist, Bible-thumping, and bigoted? They didnt. The lawsuits were kill shots.

For the left, whats not to hate about the Boy Scouts? Their oath is: On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.

Nearly 200 NASA astronauts were Boy Scouts. The great outdoorsman, Teddy Roosevelt, was such a BSA booster than he was made the one and only Chief Scout Citizen, a scout for life.

A Louis Harris & Associates study in 1996 found that men who had been scouts placed a higher value on honesty than those who had not.

But now the lawsuits have killed them. Congratulations, Democrats, the New York Times, and corporate America. (I hope all their future employees steal from them, after being raised on Grand Theft Auto instead of the Boy Scout oath.)

From the beginning, BSA has had to deal with child molesters eagerly signing up to go camping with 13-year-old boys in isolated areas away from all observation.

Within a decade of its 1910 founding, the BSA began keeping internal files on ineligible scouting volunteers, known as the perversion files.

Scout leaders were not to be alone with boys and, starting in 1988, all adult applicants were subjected to aggressive background screening. The organization promptly removed any scout leaders based on mere suspicion and alerted law enforcement in about a third of the cases.

Nonetheless, between 1970 and 1991, up to .04 percent of Boy Scouts may have been molested. Thats about 2,000 out of several million boys.

Given all of this, what sort of escaped mental patient would demand that the Boy Scouts admit openly gay scout leaders?

Yes, we know most gays arent child molesters. How could we not? Its part of our secular catechism, along with the one about most Muslims not being terrorists and most immigrants not being criminals.

But men who molest boys are a small slice infinitesimal really! within a larger category known as gay. Its not two totally different things, like an architect and a dentist. Some men like blondes. Some like brunettes. But theyre all within the category of heterosexual.

No parent is going to send their young sons camping alone in the woods with an openly gay man for the same reason they wouldnt send their adolescent daughters to be alone in the woods with an openly heterosexual man.

And now the BSA has been whiplashed into bankruptcy by liberals demanding, on one hand, that the scouts allow gays to be troop leaders and, on the other hand, filing lawsuits accusing the scouts of not taking strong enough measures to prevent gay troop leaders from molesting boys.

Couldnt liberals get together and decide for themselves whether the Boy Scouts should have been more aggressive in preventing child molestation or less?

For their defense witnesses, the Boy Scouts should call New York Times editors, Democratic politicians, and corporate CEOs.

Back in 1980, when a gay guy lost his lawsuit against BSA for dropping him as a scout leader, Wells Fargo, the United Way of San Francisco, Levi Strauss, and the Bank of America cut off funding to the organization. San Francisco and Oakland schools prohibited the scouts from using their facilities on weekdays.

After the Supreme Courts disturbingly narrow 5-4 decision in 2000 holding that the Boy Scouts could not be forced to admit gay scout leaders, the Times denounced the decision in an editorial, calling the courts ruling one of its lowest moments of the term.

The following month, the Times ethicist, Randy Cohen, advised a reader to pull her son out of the Cub Scouts, saying it was the ethical thing to do. The ethicist explained: Just as one is honor bound to quit an organization that excludes African-Americans, so you should withdraw from scouting as long as it rejects homosexuals.

Also in response to the Supreme Courts decision, Chase Manhattan Bank, Textron Inc., and dozens more United Way chapters withdrew millions of dollars in contributions. More cities dropped their support of the Boy Scouts.

In his pre-Super Bowl TV interview in 2013, President Barack Obama was still harping on the Boy Scouts refusal to allow gay scoutmasters: Gays and lesbians should have access and opportunity the same way everybody else does.

On CNN, host Carol Costello haughtily informed a guest opposed to gay scoutmasters, Well, Ill just say that the American Psychological Association has studied the issue that you just mentioned. Homosexuals arent any more likely to molest kids than straight men.

The defense rests.

Throughout the lefts 30-year assault on the Boy Scouts for discriminating against gays, the Catholic Church was embroiled in its own molestation crisis. More than 80 percent of the molester priests were accused of victimizing teenage boys.

Instead of saying, Oh I see what the Boy Scouts are doing, liberals responded to the gay sex-abuse crisis in the priesthood by blaming celibacy!

Isnt it a thought crime to question whether sexual preference is determined at birth? But liberals not only believed gayness was the result of an adult lifestyle choice celibacy but they knew how to cure it: Allow priests to marry!

Since the one thing we know is that men molesting boys has nothing to do with being gay, I guess this time its camping that causes sodomy.

Excerpt from:
Ann Coulter: Honey, We Molested the Kids! - Breitbart

Childish bickering and name calling without debating or an end in sight. Only a few I recall. Friends Republicans and Candidates: Little Marco Rubio, Lyin Ted, The Three Stooges; Mark Sanford, Joe Walsh, Bill Weld, Sloppy Steve Bannon, Wacky nut job Ann Coulter, Mr. Magoo and Dumb Southerner Jeff Sessions. Foreign leaders: My favorite dictator President of Egypt, Little Rocket Man North Korean, Britain Trump Boris Johnson, Juan Trump Mexico President.

The enemy list goes on and on: Little Michael Bloomberg, Crazy Hillary, Crooked Hillary, Heartless Hillary, Lyin' Hillary, SleepyCreepy Joe, Very slow sleepy Joe, etc. and the long media list.

Way beyond sophomoric our President, our World Leader continues his tweets, antics, name calling and embarrassing behavior while fear keeps the adults that should call him out for it cringing in the corners. Im so tired of it, please give a ballot, Mickey Mouse is looking really good.

Disclaimer: As submitted to the Arizona Daily Star.

View post:
Letter: Anyone as tired of this as me? | Letters to the Editor - Arizona Daily Star